Destroying the notes and ensuring the final report is the only product of the investigation is standard practice.
Is that so? That'd remove a red flag for me.
But this "earlier inappropriateness" thing creates an even redder flag.
What's the deal? What was supposed to have been not appropriate?
Allen had been in therapy for alleged inappropriate behavior toward Dylan with a child psychologist before the abuse allegation was presented to the authorities or made public. Mia Farrow had instructed her babysitters that Allen was never to be left alone with Dylan.
This could be the case if Allen were just a weird, callous, autistic-ish bad parent, too.
In his 33-page decision, Judge Wilk found that Mr. Allen’s behavior toward Dylan was “grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.”
Okay, so it's possible to be a grossly inappropriate parent without being a molester. Most parents wind up damaging their children's psyche one way or another, inadvertently or half-knowingly. With one or another mild or severe form of cruelty, neglect, verbal abuse, emotional abuse. Hence, why there are therapists, enough to see everyone in America, lol. I recommend pretty much anything written by R.D. Laing for more on this. But just think of the cliches alone. The father who's raised to think spanking and belting is not only appropriate, but necessary, all while being to anyone with an unobstructed conscience to be, of course: Grossly inappropriate and abusive, and yet -- astonishingly -- has the backing of millions of other likewise-grossly-inappropriate parents. Or think of the harried, lonely single mother who may on occasion shriek from the front seat that she'll pull this car over right now, and then follows through, but maybe in gentler moments may be a little too attached to a son because it's the only male presence and he's like his father. Not seen by most as grossly-inappropriate perhaps only because it's so common that it's either unnoticed or it's sanctioned out of indifference. The majority of parents, probably, are guilty at some points, or perhaps in some ways on a consistent basis, of being grossly-inappropriate. Now, is there usually a sexual component? More specifically, a conscious non-Freudian non-accidental not-just-overaffectionateness straight-up-sexual element? No. Hell no. So:
The judge also recounts Farrow’s misgivings regarding Allen’s behavior toward Dylan from the time she was between two and three years old. According to the judge’s decision, Farrow told Allen, “You look at her [Dylan] in a sexual way. You fondled her . . . You don’t give her any breathing room. You look at her when she’s naked.”
Red flags abound. But, not so fast. Fondled is a term that needs elaboration. Fondled how? Every normal parent fondles their child. If by "fondling" you mean handling or touching with affection. Which is the dictionary definition, one of them, anyway. But what did Mia mean? What did she see, what's she describing? She tells Allen he looks at a two or three year old sexually. That's an ominously-red flag, if he did, in fact, look at a toddler sexually. But how does Mia determine that about Woody? When would this have been? She was looking at him looking at Dylan in what circumstance? Because presumably Woody would've been present at a diaper-changing, and honestly, if I were a parent changing a child's diaper, I would not want Woody Allen to be an eyewitness to it. There, that's my gut feeling, if you must know. But not necessarily because I suspect him of being a pedophile, but more so because he's just
Woody Allen, who is a weirdo, who possibly has undiagnosed Asperger's, who is an anhedonic paranoid mess, who has a grossly-inappropriate relationship with
life itself. And just as much as I would feel uncomfortable with a person like that present at the changing of a child, I would also not want to subject that person to such a situation because I would suspect the person is not psychologically equipped to deal in general with such an experience in a mature, normal way. It is not in the least surprising to me that Woody Allen was judged to be a miserable failure of a parental figure. But again, Mia says he looked at Dylan sexually, which is a whole different matter. So...
Is it possible that Mia Farrow was predisposed to perceive a sexual element in whatever hopelessly-awkward way Woody Allen went about relating to a toddler? She was 19 when she dated Sinatra, eh? Does she perhaps expect a man to be a sexual predator because she was herself victimized and so now perhaps that is the lens through which some unsexual behavior could appear to her as sexual? I don't know.
But again, if I had a young daughter, would I trust Woody Allen to be alone with her?
No. At least not unless she's old enough to capably defend herself with kung fu.
But that's a separate standard.
And again, I generally wouldn't like being around Woody Allen.
A 30-something Allen might be fun. Middled-aged misanthrope? Old man Woody? No.
